•

After blocking hundreds of promotions, Tuberville said the US has 'the weakest military than we've probably had in my lifetime'

https://www.businessinsider.com/tuberville-said-us-has-the-weakest-military-in-his-lifetime-2023-11

Tuberville failed to mention that he's personally prevented hundreds of officers from being promoted because he disagrees with a 2022 Pentagon policy.

After blocking hundreds of promotions, Tuberville said the US has 'the weakest military than we've probably had in my lifetime'

Tuberville failed to mention that he's personally prevented hundreds of officers from being promoted because he disagrees with a 2022 Pentagon policy.

143 comments

See all comments

skippedtoc

•

Read the first comment in the thread. Or learn reading comprehension.

Or I suppose you can continue spouting random shit and appending honey at the end.

abbotsbury

•

honey you are seriously reaching if you choose to interpret "should not be allowed into office" as "we must abolish them"

should not vs shall not, ironic telling someone else to practice reading comprehension

SCB

•

Or I suppose you can continue spouting random shit and appending honey at the end.

Dude it was right there

skippedtoc

•

A political party which should not be allowed into office, is what? Turning a major political party into your high school group is not abolishing. Trolling has to have a limit man.

Edit: as I was typing this, I reread your comment and realized you have chosen option 2. Well played, and good luck.

abbotsbury

•

A political party which should not be allowed into office, is what?

the loser, the statement was encouraging a voting position

"everyone I disagree with is trolling"

aidan

•

the statement was encouraging a voting position

the phrasing didn't indicate that. "Should never win an election" would be much more clear than "should not be allowed" which implies prohibition.

abbotsbury

•

the phrasing didn’t indicate that

the phrasing certainly didn't indicate that they wish for the abolition of the GOP, you came up with that on your own

"should not be allowed” which implies prohibition.

you're thinking of "shouldn't be able" bud, at the end of an election there can only be one party allowed into office

aidan

•

you're thinking of "shouldn't be able" bud

Actually, I view it as the opposite. Really this is subjective language differences. But should not be allowed to me implies there is rules prohibiting, where's shouldn't be able to implies that they should just fail to.

skippedtoc

•

Hmm, it seems one of us has misinterpreted the statement. I interpreted the should not be allowed in office as, "a law should be passed saying that".

While you, perhaps correctly assumed that it means people should not vote for them. Sorry I thought you were being willfully obtuse. Still, I am not completely convinced my interpretation of statement was wrong.

But regardless, we are both apparently in agreement on this point.

But, my second point stands, that you are an unpleasant person using intimate and friendly words as an attack.